lol
Oh, the wise leader... THE most qualified candidate in history.... such a people's candidate.....

Private speech to Goldman Sachs..... she'd never say that in public....perish the thought! Honesty is the best policy, of course.
I don't know. And don't call me meat!Forty Two wrote:Oh....my..... god.... really?????
The US has nuclear weapons on bombers and subs? Who'dathunkit?
So, if it happens, where to meat?
Netherlands. It's the most neutral and diplomatic country in the world.It won't be Pyongyang, as you won't get an American President landing there and have to rely on North Korean security. Same goes for Washington DC. Plus, neither side will want to allow the other the image of superiority by "hosting" the talks. There is submissiveness of being summoned to the other's house....
It shouldn't be Panmunjom (sp?) either. That will smack too much of confrontation. That border location is a building with a national border not only through the building but through the center of the conference table. Parties star across it, as if a firefight might break out and hand to hand combat ensue right there. It's too militarized. Too tense.
It won't be South Korea for the same reason it won't be North Korea. It's the other guy's house, from the DPRK perspective.
Of the choices in the chart, we have left, international waters, and Beijing.
International waters still means someone's boat has to be chosen. The US President will want it to be one of our biggest aircraft carriers. And the DPRK won't land there for the same reason as they won't land at Reagan International. And, the US President is not landing on a North Korean ship either.
Beijing is really the only viable option out of the choices there. Both leaders have been there. It's China. It's "neutral" as between the two parties.
But, I have another option. Switzerland. Have the meetup in Switzerland. Kim went to school there. It's neutral. And it's a new location. Nobody has any arguable advantage.
I read that as Clinton putting words into Xi Jinping's mouth. Check the question she is replying to:Forty Two wrote:Hillary Clinton says we don't want a unified Korean peninsula, because the South Koreans would be dominant.....
Since I pointed his blunder out, 42 has had time to post 24 posts. Everywhere except in reply to this. Looks as though he has chosen to ignore it. I'll just add it to the lengthening list of stuff he got wrong and decided to leave undefended.pErvinalia wrote:Stand by for 8 pages of equivocation.
Sheeeeit, if 42 started to link Fox News articles instead of his usual crap, it would be an improvement.pErvinalia wrote:He's basically the Fox News of Rationalia.
Defend? It says what it says. You posted your interpretation. I don't have to respond to every one of your posts. You and others leave lots of items unrebutted. Just because I rebut something of yours doesn't appear to require you to post lengthy sur-replies.Hermit wrote:Since I pointed his blunder out, 42 has had time to post 24 posts. Everywhere except in reply to this. Looks as though he has chosen to ignore it. I'll just add it to the lengthening list of stuff he got wrong and decided to leave undefended.pErvinalia wrote:Stand by for 8 pages of equivocation.
Because like everyone else I don't respond to everything on the board, and my reasons are that I don't give a fuck what you think. Screw off.pErvinalia wrote:FUCK OFF, he doesn't leave things undefended! He addresses everything. And if he doesn't address it, it doesn't need addressing, because reasons.
Oh, fuck off. You people post bullshit all day long, and then bark like fucking seals when you think you've got one over on me. He posted a fucking different interpretation. It's not the discovery of a unified field theory. Jesus fucking Christ with you people.... weirdos.Seabass wrote:So, Forty Two calls real news fake news, and posts fake news as if it's real news.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests